UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Off Topic and General Discussions => 911 Terror Attacks - Debate the Conspiracy Theories => Topic started by: Tim Invictus on June 24, 2014, 03:22:44 PM
-
Hi John/mods
Can we have a section in the 'Other High Profile Cases' on the 911 conspiracy theories please?
Personally I am always sceptical about 'nutters' who scream conspiracy and I watched a few videos more out of amusement than any serious interest. Against my natural tendencies I found many of the facts of 911 quite shocking and slowly but surely my opinion has changed completely; I am now convinced 911 is perhaps the biggest MOJ in history.
We need to discuss this in detail.
-
Nah then, Tim. Did you watch the Loose Change film?
A few things about 9/11 dont add up, like the plane hitting the Pentagon, the hole it left wasnt big enough for a plane to have made it!
I dont think its a conspiracy though, Al Qaeda accepted responsibility for the attacks didnt they?
-
Nah then, Tim. Did you watch the Loose Change film?
A few things about 9/11 dont add up, like the plane hitting the Pentagon, the hole it left wasnt big enough for a plane to have made it!
I dont think its a conspiracy though, Al Qaeda accepted responsibility for the attacks didnt they?
Yep watched Loose Change video Andi. The hole in the Pentagon is just one of the facts that doesn't make sense. Where is the video showing the plane hitting the Pentagon .... the FBI seized CCTV recordings that covered the building from nearby hotels, petrol station forecourts, etc.and won't release them. The Pentagon is perhaps the best protected building in the world completely covered with security systems including CCTV and yet they won't (can't?) provide any film of thr plane!
That's just a couple of the unexplainable facts. The others are even more compelling evidence that the story we have been told is not the truth.
When did Al Qeada admit responsibility Andy? Surely you don't mean the ridiculously faked Osama Bin Laden videos that the CIA even admitted were fake?
Loose Change video:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YsRm8M-qOjQ
-
Were they fake? Oh I didn't know that.
Not watched anything for a while about 9\11, need to catch up!
I agree though, there are things that don't seem quite right. Don't really go for the conspiracy thing though tbh.
-
Were they fake? Oh I didn't know that.
Not watched anything for a while about 9\11, need to catch up!
I agree though, there are things that don't seem quite right. Don't really go for the conspiracy thing though tbh.
I was exactly the same as you Andi .... I thought it would all be rubbish like listening to David Ike.
It was World Trade Centre 7 that convinced me. This huge building (47 stories) drops like a brick late the same day as the towers and this building wasn't hit by anything. There have been numerous fires in steel skyscrapers around the world and only 3 have ever collapsed .... the 3 on 9/11.
And all 3 buildings fell at free fall speed. No progressive collapse. Literally 100's of qualified engineers have gone on record to say this can only happen if the building support is cut away at ground level .... a controlled demolition. Basically kicking the feet from under the buildings.
Cockpit voice recorders and Flight Data Recorders are virtually indestructible and have been recovered in virtually all plane crashes including from the bottom of the Atlantic and head on crashes into mountains. Not one of these 8 (2 per plane) was recovered on 9/11.
The "let's roll" flight 93 that crashed in Shanksville had literally no aircraft debris. Not even engines. This has never happened before in the history of aviation.
The heart rending phone calls from the passengers on flight 93 could not have been made on cell phones as we are told. Cell phones to this day do not work on planes except when close to the ground on take off and landing.
In the year before 911 in USA, 67 flights went off route for some reason or another and were suspected possible hijackings. On each occasion US air defence sent up fighter jets to investigate. On all 67 occasions the fighters intercepted the planes within 10 minutes. On 911 all 4 planes were in the air for up to 90 minutes and not one plane had a fighter jet go anywhere near it!
These are just a few more startling facts .... there are many more.
-
I've only ever gone along with the official line.
I recall reading at the time some conspiracy theory re Mossad involvement to ignite a war in the Middle East with US backing, but I cant buy into this at all. I cant see any government official(s) from any country (excl rogue states) sanctioning such an atrocity with such an inevitably high civilian death toll.
The father of Mohamed Atta claimed his son was not involved but then I guess he would say that.
I doubt many structural engineers test models based on 10,000 gallons of jet fuel being spewed out and fires starting up in various locations with temperatures reaching 1000c.
If not Al-Qaeda then who? And what would be the motivation?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14665953
Its amazing that in many ways the plot was so simple, compared with the might of the US, and yet so successful at striking at the very heart of everything Jihadists despise.
I was on a city break in NYC in Oct '03 and it was eery seeing ground zero and more so seeing landscape images pre 9/11 and then physically seeing this huge open space 8(8-))
-
I've only ever gone along with the official line.
I recall reading at the time some conspiracy theory re Mossad involvement to ignite a war in the Middle East with US backing, but I cant buy into this at all. I cant see any government official(s) from any country (excl rogue states) sanctioning such an atrocity with such an inevitably high civilian death toll.
U
The father of Mohamed Atta claimed his son was not involved but then I guess he would say that.
I doubt many structural engineers test models based on 10,000 gallons of jet fuel being spewed out and fires starting up in various locations with temperatures reaching 1000c.
If not Al-Qaeda then who? And what would be the motivation?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14665953
Its amazing that in many ways the plot was so simple, compared with the might of the US, and yet so successful at striking at the very heart of everything Jihadists despise.
I was on a city break in NYC in Oct '03 and it was eery seeing ground zero and more so seeing landscape images pre 9/11 and then physically seeing this huge open space 8(8-))
I was the same as you Holly.
I haven't seen Ground Zero but I can imagine how eery it is there; I remember well going up the WTC tower and eating at the Windows On The World restaurant and to watch those towers fall was just incredible.
Watch the videos Hols and read the facts then see if you change your mind. I never dreamt for a moment I would become a 'truther' but the facts of the matter are inescapable .... imho.
On your points above; the huge fireballs on impact are the planes jet fuel exploding. Even if some jet fuel didn't burn off it only burns at 1100c which by all scientific accounts is nowhere near hot enough to melt steel. A firefighter who reached the firers radioed back there were 2 isolated pockets of fire and they could "knock them down with two hoses"!
Even if the plane damage and jet fuel fires could explain the Twin Towers, WTC 7 collapsed like a pack of cards and wasn't hit by anything. This huge steel building was a 100 yards from the Towers.
Your point as to 'why on earth would anyone do this' is the key question. There are untold billions of reasons why they would do this and they are $'s. The very reasons Pearl Harbour was provoked by the US government and then 'allowed' to happen. The same reasons the The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident was faked and President Kennedy was assassinated!
America prospers in a war economy with all the multi-billion $ arms contracts and a small circle of very influential people get very rich (much richer!) from their interests in the armament contractors. Look into The Carlyle Group with millions and millions made for it's very influential members .... people like John Major, the Bush family and the brother of one Osama Bin Laden!
Don't take my word for it, even The Economist recognises how shady and secretive this group is!
http://www.economist.com/node/1875084
Not only do these neo-cons get personally much richer but their country gets much more powerful and dominates "The New American Century"! Talk about a win - win situation!
Months before 911 a think-tank called The Project For The New American Century with members such as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfelt and Jed Bush (Dubya's brother) pronounced that the building up of America's world dominance would be a long slow process unless (and I quote) "there was a catastrophic and catalysing event - a new Pearl Harbour"!
Again don't take my word for it:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_Harbor.22
I think Scipio is a bit of a Republican, neo-con .... it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this too!
-
I was the same as you Holly.
I haven't seen Ground Zero but I can imagine how eery it is there; I remember well going up the WTC tower and eating at the Windows On The World restaurant and to watch those towers fall was just incredible.
Watch the videos Hols and read the facts then see if you change your mind. I never dreamt for a moment I would become a 'truther' but the facts of the matter are inescapable .... imho.
On your points above; the huge fireballs on impact are the planes jet fuel exploding. Even if some jet fuel didn't burn off it only burns at 1100c which by all scientific accounts is nowhere near hot enough to melt steel. A firefighter who reached the firers radioed back there were 2 isolated pockets of fire and they could "knock them down with two hoses"!
Even if the plane damage and jet fuel fires could explain the Twin Towers, WTC 7 collapsed like a pack of cards and wasn't hit by anything. This huge steel building was a 100 yards from the Towers.
Your point as to 'why on earth would anyone do this' is the key question. There are untold billions of reasons why they would do this and they are $'s. The very reasons Pearl Harbour was provoked by the US government and then 'allowed' to happen. The same reasons the The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident was faked and President Kennedy was assassinated!
America prospers in a war economy with all the multi-billion $ arms contracts and a small circle of very influential people get very rich (much richer!) from their interests in the armament contractors. Look into The Carlyle Group with millions and millions made for it's very influential members .... people like John Major, the Bush family and the brother of one Osama Bin Laden!
Don't take my word for it, even The Economist recognises how shady and secretive this group is!
http://www.economist.com/node/1875084
Not only do these neo-cons get personally much richer but their country gets much more powerful and dominates "The New American Century"! Talk about a win - win situation!
Months before 911 a think-tank called The Project For The New American Century with members such as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfelt and Jed Bush (Dubya's brother) pronounced that the building up of America's world dominance would be a long slow process unless (and I quote) "there was a catastrophic and catalysing event - a new Pearl Harbour"!
Again don't take my word for it:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_Harbor.22
I think Scipio is a bit of a Republican, neo-con .... it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this too!
Thank you for the links Tim.
I will attempt to digest. It will take me a while to get my Goodhead round 8)--))
I think the religious ideology of Al-Queda is closer to madness than the political ideology of Dick Cheney et al. And whoever masterminded 9/11 would have to be pretty mad imo.
-
Tim on 9\11, were they having some sort of practice drill with the air force etc? I remember hearing a recording of air traffic control asking if the attacks were for real or part of the drill. All very strange.
-
Tim on 9\11, were they having some sort of practice drill with the air force etc? I remember hearing a recording of air traffic control asking if the attacks were for real or part of the drill. All very strange.
Yep that's true too Andy. Jet fighters stationed 15 miles from the Pentagon were sent 200 miles away to N. Carolina 'on exercise'. Jets near Boston/NYC were sent north to Canada 'on exercise'. There was some further exercise involving fake hijacked planes too.
All very confusing and I think that was actually the plan. I don't think for one second local air defence commanders and pilots would conspire to allow jets to crash into the WTC and Pentagon for a second. I think they were presented with so much confusion and misinformation the military and Federal Aviation Authorities didn't have a clue what was happening until it was too late.
Just another unbelievable aspect of the 911 story!
-
Hmm, I do love a good conspiracy theory I must admit, even if I don't agree with it.
There are some eminent people that believe all is not right regarding 9\11.
Did you see the video of one of the planes close up? There was a black thing under the fuselage and one of them didn't look like a commercial passenger plane.
-
But for what reason would bush do that to his own people?
-
Yep that's true too Andy. Jet fighters stationed 15 miles from the Pentagon were sent 200 miles away to N. Carolina 'on exercise'. Jets near Boston/NYC were sent north to Canada 'on exercise'. There was some further exercise involving fake hijacked planes too.
All very confusing and I think that was actually the plan. I don't think for one second local air defence commanders and pilots would conspire to allow jets to crash into the WTC and Pentagon for a second. I think they were presented with so much confusion and misinformation the military and Federal Aviation Authorities didn't have a clue what was happening until it was too late.
Just another unbelievable aspect of the 911 story!
I can't go with this, Timbo. Would so many lives have been sacrificed?
My sister was there at the time, it took me 4 days to reach her on her mobile. We were frantic.
Have you seen the footage of people there? Panicking and running away? And the firefighters?
-
That was all genuine shona, the panic etc. People question the official story that it was a terrorist attack. That's the conspiracy.
-
That was all genuine shona, the panic etc. People question the official story that it was a terrorist attack. That's the conspiracy.
I just think it's too big.
Do you remember Bush's face when he was told about the attack?
-
Yes, but he didn't get up and. Leave the classroom for something like 11 minutes. I sound like I believe all this conspiracy stuff now!
-
Some of it doesn't make. Sense.
There was no debris from the plane that went down in that field. They showed footage of the plane that hit the Pentagon,CCTV from a gas station across from the Pentogon, it looked like a missile not a plane.
-
Yes, but he didn't get up and. Leave the classroom for something like 11 minutes. I sound like I believe all this conspiracy stuff now!
I get that, but if all those innocent people died to basically make a point, then we're all f..ked. There are no rules anymore. No safety, no boundaries, no reason to exist. Too terrible to contemplate.
-
I agree, its frightening.
-
I agree, its frightening.
Years ago, did you watch "Threads"? About a nuclear attack? It scared the crap out of me. Still does, if I'm honest. It still haunts me.
Can we talk about kittens now?? 8((()*/
-
Years ago, did you watch "Threads"? About a nuclear attack? It scared the crap out of me. Still does, if I'm honest. It still haunts me.
Can we talk about kittens now?? 8((()*/
Or....we could always talk about Jeremy Bamber. And Agent Z. Ho ho!!
-
I never watched threads but I remember how people talked about it. It haunted my mam too.
Was it shown in the early 80's?
-
I never watched threads but I remember how people talked about it. It haunted my mam too.
Was it shown in the early 80's?
I think it was 84, and your mate Zak Dingle was in it. BT and I were going to Tenby the next day, I was doing a pile of ironing, and getting very upset while watching it. We actually made plans about what we'd do with the animals if it all kicked off. You can still see it on youtube.
-
Oh my god you have reminded me, my mam said she would give my sister and I an overdose of sleeping pills then take some herself and we would all die together! Nice one mam! No wonder I ended up glue sniffing!!!
-
Oh my god you have reminded me, my mam said she would give my sister and I an overdose of sleeping pills then take some herself and we would all die together! Nice one mam! No wonder I ended up glue sniffing!!!
HO!!! That's how Adrian Mole ended up with a plane stuck to his nose!!
Anyhoo. I love scipio, and want his babies. I love you too, Andi. When Gladys says "trow" it makes him sound like a prize w......., and if Bamber had thought it through, he would have smeared some of Ralph's blood on the phone. The greedy, lying, murdering tw...
Enjoy your sprouts, Bamber, because you're going exactly nowhere. ?{)(**
-
I have just been reading and watching about AE-911 .... Architects & Engineers For 911 Truth.
http://www.ae911truth.org
The group has currently 2207 architects, structural engineers, demolition experts, fire prevention/safety experts, physicists, metallurgy experts, etc. The group is non profit making and all qualifications of members are checked. They have produced a number of utterly compelling videos available on youtube describing their findings!
The emphasis of the group is the physical collapse of the Twin Towers and WTC7 and how these buildings could not have been brought down by fire. They emphasise that the only steel buildings in history to have completely collapsed due to fire are The Twin Towers and WTC7. All three buildings fell at free fall speed which they prove (to me at least) only occurs in controlled demolitions.
Watch this short video. Even the most sceptic observer has to admit the free fall collapse of WTC7 is very strange indeed! (imho)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-NrASZxGu_o
-
There is a first time for everything, just like there was for a group of Arab terrorists taking over civilian jets and flying them into buildings at 500 mph.
Conspiracy? Nah, not on your Nelly. @)(++(*
-
There are lots of things that don't make sense about 9\11, John.
Tim, has already pointed some of them out. I don't go with the conspiracy theory, but will keep an open mind on it. Apart from that it makes for interesting viewing and reading.
-
There is a first time for everything, just like there was for a group of Arab terrorists taking over civilian jets and flying them into buildings at 500 mph.
Conspiracy? Nah, not on your Nelly. @)(++(*
Come on John, that's a way too simplistic comment. Only two buildings in NY were hit by planes .... what about the 3rd 47 storey building hit by nothing falling down like a stack of cards?
Of course buildings can collapse and jet liners hitting them laden with fuel is a damn good reason to me too. But one of those buildings wasn't hit by anything and for all 3 to fall at free fall speed all structural support columns have to have failed simultaneously.
-
Hey John can you explain this to me? The BBC announcing the collapse of WTC 7 20 minutes before the building fell!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI
-
Interesting stuff here! Not that I know too much about the details about 911.
Have you seen this?
He mentions two impossibilities in this video.
I can see three: the plane doesnīt change angle - at all, even though the plane moves into the picture and in perspective (hope you know what I mean). It is like a cut-out picture of a plane computer-animated (badly I might add, I know about these things...) by simply moving it through the picture.
Why didnīt they use 3D animation at least? This is cheap cut-out animation - at least of the plane! The "impact animation" where the plane goes into the building is 3D animation.
I always wondered how the plane could slide into the building so smoothly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6bk4dMjl4g
Gosh, this is interesting!! No doubt this is animation - I just donīt know who made it. Have to look at more videos of this.
-
Interesting stuff here! Not that I know too much about the details about 911.
Have you seen this?
He mentions two impossibilities in this video.
I can see three: the plane doesnīt change angle - at all, even though the plane moves into the picture and in perspective (hope you know what I mean). It is like a cut-out picture of a plane computer-animated (badly I might add, I know about these things...) by simply moving it through the picture.
Why didnīt they use 3D animation at least? This is cheap cut-out animation - at least of the plane! The "impact animation" where the plane goes into the building is 3D animation.
I always wondered how the plane could slide into the building so smoothly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6bk4dMjl4g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6bk4dMjl4g)
Gosh, this is interesting!! No doubt this is animation - I just donīt know who made it. Have to look at more videos of this.
Yes, but look at this similar video of the same plane flying into the second tower. Does the port wing disappear behind the smaller tower in the background or not, like it seems to do in your "fake" video link?
http://youtu.be/mhROd7Jt3-w?t=1m15s (http://youtu.be/mhROd7Jt3-w?t=1m15s)
Also interesting is the structure which appears to be fixed underneath the fuselage! Is it a contraption to fire a missile into the building before impact? Or just a poor photo of the underside when compared with that of a normal plane.
How accurate or truthful is the interpretation of the flash occurring on the side of the tower milliseconds before impact of the plane's nose?
This conspiracy theory raises more questions than answers. >@@(*&)
-
P.S. I love conspiracy theories and WANT to believe in them! Like UFOs, WANT them to be there, but they arenīt! 8)><(
About that video I posted, the building which is claimed to be in the background could actually be in the foreground. Should be verifiable though.
I still have a problem with the angle of the plane and the way it slides into the building though.
-
P.S. I love conspiracy theories and WANT to believe in them! Like UFOs, WANT them to be there, but they arenīt! 8)><(
About that video I posted, the building which is claimed to be in the background could actually be in the foreground. Should be verifiable though.
I still have a problem with the angle of the plane and the way it slides into the building though.
Edit to add - posted this before I saw your post, Myster, not meaning to ignore ya! First I claim you are female then ignore you, what a mess! 8)><(
-
Yes, but look at this similar video of the same plane flying into the second tower. Does the port wing disappear behind the smaller tower in the background or not, like it seems to do in your "fake" video link?
http://youtu.be/mhROd7Jt3-w?t=1m15s (http://youtu.be/mhROd7Jt3-w?t=1m15s)
Also interesting is the structure which appears to be fixed underneath the fuselage! Is it a contraption to fire a missile into the building before impact? Or just a poor photo of the underside when compared with that of a normal plane.
How accurate or truthful is the interpretation of the flash occurring on the side of the tower milliseconds before impact of the plane's nose?
This conspiracy theory raises more questions than answers. >@@(*&)
I see what you mean.
OMG, now I cannot stop watching videos about this!
Took a screenshot from your link btw, to me it looks at if the wing is behind the building - as in mine; but they are both unclear. In your link, the plane is "double exposed" all the way - no idea why.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
P.S. I love conspiracy theories and WANT to believe in them! Like UFOs, WANT them to be there, but they arenīt! 8)><(
About that video I posted, the building which is claimed to be in the background could actually be in the foreground. Should be verifiable though.
I still have a problem with the angle of the plane and the way it slides into the building though.
It was a curtain-walled building, mostly glass and metal construction outside and open plan offices with lightweight partitioning towards the centre. WTC 1 plan below but WTC 2 of similar construction...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/images/NISTNCSTAR_1D_1-5_96-floor-plan-wtc1.jpg (http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/images/NISTNCSTAR_1D_1-5_96-floor-plan-wtc1.jpg)
The plane at such a high speed could easily slice through it like a hot knife through butter.
"First I claim you are female then ignore you, what a mess!"
Only joking that I'm angry as you well know! 8((()*/
-
Abs and Myster ... great videos!
I have seen a lot of stuff posted about 'fake planes' and missile strikes but have kind of avoided the subject as being so outlandish and crazy! If this stuff is true then the World really is turned upside down and we can't even believe our own eyes!
I have to say it looks like that wing tip does go behind that building and it does look like there is a flash in front of the plane milliseconds before it strikes the second tower! Crazy man crazy! I have to say too I have always thought the film of the second plane looks weird!
There is just so much about 911 that doesn't add up! 8-)(--)
PS: I have asked John in the first thread to set up a discussion area in 'Other High Profiles' for this subject ... give him a boot up the bum please Myster! 8)--))
-
I see what you mean.
OMG, now I cannot stop watching videos about this!
Took a screenshot from your link btw, to me it looks at if the wing is behind the building - as in mine; but they are both unclear. In your link, the plane is "double exposed" all the way - no idea why.
I think it's clearer just looking at the motion video over and over than at a fixed screenshot. It's almost too fast to see, but I still think the port wing comes nowhere near to that building in the background.
-
Abs and Myster ... great videos!
I have seen a lot of stuff posted about 'fake planes' and missile strikes but have kind of avoided the subject as being so outlandish and crazy! If this stuff is true then the World really is turned upside down and we can't even believe our own eyes!
I have to say it looks like that wing tip does go behind that building and it does look like there is a flash in front of the plane milliseconds before it strikes the second tower! Crazy man crazy! I have to say too I have always thought the film of the second plane looks weird!
There is just so much about 911 that doesn't add up! 8-)(--)
PS: I have asked John in the first thread to set up a discussion area in 'Other High Profiles' for this subject ... give him a boot up the bum please Myster! 8)--))
8((()*/
I think John works his magic during the early hours when the rest of us are sending them home!
If he sees your repeated request there might be a chance of him creating a new section in the appropriate place (although he'll need a lot of convincing that there was a conspiracy).
-
I think it's clearer just looking at the motion video over and over than at a fixed screenshot. It's almost too fast to see, but I still think the port wing comes nowhere near to that building in the background.
It is hard to tell. The double exposure (donīt know what else to call it) creates an optical illusion.
I know a man who was working inside one of the twin towers when this happened. They were trapped in their floor for quite a long time, half an hour, something like that. I donīt remember which floor he was on, but it was high up. He said there was no panic, but they were hammering on doors until someone heard and let them out. Canīt remember why they couldnīt get out.
On the way down the stairs people were calm, but he saw some people horribly burnt.
-
8((()*/
I think John works his magic during the early hours when the rest of us are sending them home!
If he sees your repeated request there might be a chance of him creating a new section in the appropriate place (although he'll need a lot of convincing that there was a conspiracy).
John shouldn't need convincing .... it's a discussion area just like 'Maddie McCann' etc. and far more current than thhe Bamber case which is a dead duck! Bamber aint goin' anywhere .... ever!
-
Is it a normal, everyday thing for the president of the USA to be sitting in on a class with young children - and for so loooong?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na600UB-bG0
-
Is it a normal, everyday thing for the president of the USA to be sitting in on a class with young children - and for so loooong?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na600UB-bG0
If 'Dubya' did know what was going to happen, what is the most 'innocent' filming they could do of the President! A classroom full of kids .... and it's an excuse to have him filmed 'being innocent' at 9.00 in the morning!
He didn't seem so innocent when he refused to testify under oath before the 911 Commission. He would only appear with Dick Cheney, not under oath, behind closed doors and with no visual or audio recording! Sounds like he had something to hide to me!
-
If 'Dubya' did know what was going to happen, what is the most 'innocent' filming they could do of the President! A classroom full of kids .... and it's an excuse to have him filmed 'being innocent' at 9.00 in the morning!
He didn't seem so innocent when he refused to testify under oath before the 911 Commission. He would only appear with Dick Cheney, not under oath, behind closed doors and with no visual or audio recording! Sounds like he had something to hide to me!
Yes, exactly. Just doesnīt seem a thing the president would be doing, does it? Sitting there listening to that crap from that annoying teacher and monotone kids minute after minute after minute!
This sort of thing is normally what the first lady would do - not the president, goddamnit!
-
Yes, exactly. Just doesnīt seem a thing the president would be doing, does it? Sitting there listening to that crap from that annoying teacher and monotone kids minute after minute after minute!
This sort of thing is normally what the first lady would do - not the president, goddamnit!
I totally agree. And the school is in Sarasota, Florida, many 100's of miles from Washington. You really wouldn't expect them to schedule such a thing for so early in the morning when anywhere the President goes is a huge security operation! And of course it was filmed too all ready for showing on the news!
I wonder how many days in a year the US President is out being filmed at 9.00am! Stage managed!
-
The visit could have been planned, and one of the childrens parents filmed it? Just playing Devils Advocate here.
-
The visit could have been planned, and one of the childrens parents filmed it? Just playing Devils Advocate here.
Hi Andi. Could be, but wouldnīt a parent focus on his/her child - of course also the very important visitor, but the camera is pretty much glued on Geroge Bush the entire time, and no particular child seems to be the focus.
I could be wrong, the whole thing just comes across very odd.
Also the fact that he is told about the attack(s?) and then just sits there for quite a long time. Wouldnīt security kick in in a situation like this - get the president to a safe place, not just let him sit there listening to third-gradersīreading skills looking dumbfounded?
-
It is strange that he sat there for so long...but. I started watching these conspiracy videos years ago. I do love a good conspiracy theory.
-
So many of the little things about 911 just sound so ridiculously set up you don't know whether to laugh or just shake your head!
In the Shanksville crash, the 'plane' was obliterated! Items that in all other instances survive anything like the 6 ton engines and indestructible voice and data recorders are supposedly atomised in this unique crash! But what did they find and produce as evidence? A Saudi passport belonging to one of the terrorists. A Saudi driving license belonging to one of the terrorists and to top it all a f--king red bandana ...... of course we will all guess straight away this was worn by one of the terrorists!
And what was found on the streets of New York in the dust of the Twin Towers? Two passports that survived the crashes and massive fireballs and yes of course, they belonged to two of the terrorists from the planes!
Unbelievable!
-
The hi-jackers were positively identified via a number of different ways. One being CCTV at the airports. Every aspect of their lives were scrutinised including pilot training and links to Al-Quaeda. If not Jihadists who would be prepared to carry out such an atrocity and know they were going to die in the process?
-
The hi-jackers were positively identified via a number of different ways. One being CCTV at the airports. Every aspect of their lives were scrutinised including pilot training and links to Al-Quaeda. If not Jihadists who would be prepared to carry out such an atrocity and know they were going to die in the process?
Grainy airport CCTV images are doubtful evidence at best Hols. Yes the MSM gave loads of details of the 19 hijackers Al Qaeda links and pilot training etc. .... what they hardly report is that many of the 19 hijackers are reported to be still alive.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
Obviously I agree no one is going to commit suicide by crashing a plane as part of a conspiracy. I don't even pretend to know the truth Hols but I am convinced we don't know it yet! To me there is no way the Pentagon and Shanksville 'crashes' were jet liners; there is no evidence whatsoever of the huge engines or any other debris always seen at crashes of 100 ton planes!
As for the Twin Towers .... god only knows, but I have to say nothing seems right to me. Especially the collapse of WTC 7!
Another very interesting fact I learned today; the destination of the hijacked planes was LAX (Los Angeles) airport. 100's of passengers from the flights were supposedly expected to land there but there were no friends or relatives at the airport either waiting for them or there trying to find out what was going on!
True the planes weren't supposed to land at LAX for a few hours but we always see on the news people rushing to the destination airport whenever there is a hijacking or crash! Then, guess what, the whole airport was closed 'for security reasons'!
Perhaps closing the airport is kind of understandable too but surely there should have been 100's of frantic friends/family members outside desperate to find out about their loved ones? The police and/or the airlines would surely have taken all these people to a holding place like a hotel and announced on the media where people trying to get to the airport should go!
Invariably the media rush to the airport or hotel to get high rating news coverage of the desperate people waiting for news. We see it all the time like during the recent loss of the Malaysian jet.
But for 911 at LAX? Nothing! Weird or what?
-
This stuff is doing my head in now! 8-)(--)
Curiouser and curiouser!: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PG3uaQxc8uQ
-
The recoveries of the passports and other plastic/paper/fabric retrieved get to me! Seems impossible! Did they fly out of the windows of the planes right before impact?!
There are photos of the items (skroll down) in this link:
http://www.fromdusktildawn.org.uk/Keith%27s%20view/understanding_911.htm
P.S. Some very good visual material in this link apart from the items I mentioned!
-
The recoveries of the passports and other plastic/paper/fabric retrieved get to me! Seems impossible! Did they fly out of the windows of the planes right before impact?!
There are photos of the items (skroll down) in this link:
http://www.fromdusktildawn.org.uk/Keith%27s%20view/understanding_911.htm
P.S. Some very good visual material in this link apart from the items I mentioned!
Very interesting Abs!
Not only are their 2,207 architects and engineers who totally refute the official story. Dozens of explosive and demolition experts and numerous professors and scientists also challenge the official jackanory!
There is a worldwide association of pilots seeking the truth:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org
There is an association of over 300 911 survivors and bereaved family members: http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html
400 + medical professionals:
http://mp911truth.org
220+ senior military, law enforcement, intelligence services professionals:
http://patriotsquestion911.com
New York NYFD firefighters:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110911032318/firefightersfor911truth.org/
Over 100 firefighters have testified to hearing multiple large explosions inside the Twin Towers after the planes hit and (obviously) before they fell! These men lost 341 of their colleagues in the WTC collapses .... I hardly think they would tell anything but the truth!
I am sure there are loads of other very relevant groups seeking the truth but that's it for now .... my curry just got delivered!
-
I don't hold with the 9/11 conspiracists because it has been too well documented. The jet that flew into the ground vaporised as you would do if you hit Terra firma at 500 mph. Same with the aircraft which flew into the Pentagon, a jet is really a tube with a pointed nose and two slim bits sticking out each side. The damage to the Pentagon and the twin towers was identical initially, just like a bullet entering a body. A small entry wound followed by massive disruption internally.
Those who invented these conspiracies want to deny the terrorists their glory because at the end of the day the US was naive and a sitting duck!
-
I don't hold with the 9/11 conspiracists because it has been too well documented. The jet that flew into the ground vaporised as you would do if you hit Terra firma at 500 mph. Same with the aircraft which flew into the Pentagon, a jet is really a tube with a pointed nose and two slim bits sticking out each side. The damage to the Pentagon and the twin towers was identical initially, just like a bullet entering a body. A small entry wound followed by massive disruption internally.
Those who invented these conspiracies want to deny the terrorists their glory because at the end of the day the US was naive and a sitting duck!
What do you think about WTC 7 collapsing Angelo?
No buildings have ever collapsed like that building and it wasn't hit by anything! There's no progressive or partial collapse; just a whole building free falling! And the BBC announced it had collapsed 20 minutes before it happened!
Strange?
-
This is a very good and I would say compelling 911 documentary.
1 hr 12 mins
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oPRILY10Ms4
-
A British friend who is interested in the Amityville Murders (there is some play being performed in the UK about the murders so apparently some interest in the case) told me about this case. Someone also posted about it on an Amityville message board as the UK's Amityville equivalent. I talked about the many differences in both and saw all the various articles and claims that made it look like Jeremy was innocent so decided to look in more detail if that is true. I was open to the idea he was actually innocent which made it more interesting but after researching it was clear those defending Jeremy are full of crap and the press simply publishing unfounded claims the defense has been making.
After seeing the evidence against the Menendez Brothers and Arias it was so clear they were guilty that it was not really worth following the court cases in much detail, just what the news showed. Most care about the raunchy sex stories and supposed beauty of Arias instead of the case itself anyway. That is what was sensationized and written about extensively in tabloids and articles.
The Casey Anthony case I didnd't follow in great deatail because the conclusion was obvious. They had evidence suggesting she hid the corpse but no evidence of her killing the child. They had nothing that could overcome her claim the child died by accident as opposed to in some nefarious way. In our system it was obvious they lacked the necessary evidence to prove murder or even manslaughter. So I was not surprised by the verdict at all and predicted it to people who wanted to discuss the matter but I chose not to watch it unfold. I personally believe that at minimum her negligence led to the death so wish they could have got her for something relatively serious. They framed their case all wrong though.
As far as modern cases I mostly look at ones where people vanish and there thus are giant unknowns. Some like Holly Bobo they have resolved but others like Jessica Heeringa remain unsolved.
Interesting Scipio. I have to say your in depth study of the Bamber case is impressive; far more detailed about the case than me and I have followed it since the day Bamber killed them all! No one will forget Bamber being exposed for trying to sell porn photos of 'Bambi' to the gutter press; it was huge news at the time and after that no one was surprised when he was convicted!
So Scipio how come you haven't commented upon the 911 threads? I originally thought the 'truthers' were all nutjobs but I have been converted and now I am convinced it is all one big lie. Have a look at this video, maybe this very high ranking US officer might get you wondering? (20 mins.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LBRASvv471A
-
Interesting Scipio. I have to say your in depth study of the Bamber case is impressive; far more detailed about the case than me and I have followed it since the day Bamber killed them all! No one will forget Bamber being exposed for trying to sell porn photos of 'Bambi' to the gutter press; it was huge news at the time and after that no one was surprised when he was convicted!
So Scipio how come you haven't commented upon the 911 threads? I originally thought the 'truthers' were all nutjobs but I have been converted and now I am convinced it is all one big lie. Have a look at this video, maybe this very high ranking US officer might get you wondering? (20 mins.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LBRASvv471A
I used to comment and debate 911 back in the day. There is little point today because it is known that 911 truthers are crackpots peddling nonsense.
You might like to know that Stubbelbine retred fromt he Army in 1984, has dementia and is nuts so posting a video from him is not of much value. He was not anywhere near the Pentagon at the time of the attack and had no government contacts. In fact many truthers insist he is a plant to discredit them. He is on video saying crazy things like that he believes people can walk through walls though and do all sorts of things with our minds like bend objects. He has a history of making ridiculous claims including passing himself off as an expert in food standards.
His claims in relation to 911 are all nonsense and he has no proof of any kind to support any of his claims. But even worse just look at the inconsistency of his claims:
Later I saw another photograph taken by one of the sensors on the outside of the Pentagon. Now, all of the sensors had been turned off, which is kind of interesting isnt it? That day, why would all of the sensors around the Pentagon be turned off?"
So he claims all the sensors were turned off yet contradicts himself saying a sensor took a photo. Did he have access to any information that the public at large did not have? No he was out of the military a long time and had no access at all to any government records only the same reports released to the public.
In the hole, however, was a turbine that looked like a turbine from the missile
I cant prove that, I dont know. But there was something there that did not look like the engine from an airplane, but did look like a turbine from a missile.
It was documented to be an engine from an airplane. The damage to the Pentagon is fully consistent with damage from an airplane. Wings shred when they strike an object like the Pentagon. There is nothing at all surprising that the wings shredded and did not make a hole that is shaped exactly like an airplane. Since he offers no evidence of any kind to back up his claims and just makes wild assertions there is not really much of a need to bother to address all of his claims. His claims of the radar system being turned off is nonsense.
911 conspiracy theorists claims have been so discredited there is little need to even bother refuting them anymore and can simply be refuted by posting debunking done by others.
For instance, here is something that refutes the babble usually cited about anti-aircraft batteries at the Pentagon in 2001:
http://www.jod911.com/There_Are_No_Missile_Defenses_at_the_Pentagon.pdf
-
I used to comment and debate 911 back in the day. There is little point today because it is known that 911 truthers are crackpots peddling nonsense.
You might like to know that Stubbelbine retred fromt he Army in 1984, has dementia and is nuts so posting a video from him is not of much value. He was not anywhere near the Pentagon at the time of the attack and had no government contacts. In fact many truthers insist he is a plant to discredit them. He is on video saying crazy things like that he believes people can walk through walls though and do all sorts of things with our minds like bend objects. He has a history of making ridiculous claims including passing himself off as an expert in food standards.
His claims in relation to 911 are all nonsense and he has no proof of any kind to support any of his claims. But even worse just look at the inconsistency of his claims:
Later I saw another photograph taken by one of the sensors on the outside of the Pentagon. Now, all of the sensors had been turned off, which is kind of interesting isnt it? That day, why would all of the sensors around the Pentagon be turned off?"
So he claims all the sensors were turned off yet contradicts himself saying a sensor took a photo. Did he have access to any information that the public at large did not have? No he was out of the military a long time and had no access at all to any government records only the same reports released to the public.
In the hole, however, was a turbine that looked like a turbine from the missile
I cant prove that, I dont know. But there was something there that did not look like the engine from an airplane, but did look like a turbine from a missile.
It was documented to be an engine from an airplane. The damage to the Pentagon is fully consistent with damage from an airplane. Wings shred when they strike an object like the Pentagon. There is nothing at all surprising that the wings shredded and did not make a hole that is shaped exactly like an airplane. Since he offers no evidence of any kind to back up his claims and just makes wild assertions there is not really much of a need to bother to address all of his claims. His claims of the radar system being turned off is nonsense.
911 conspiracy theorists claims have been so discredited there is little need to even bother refuting them anymore and can simply be refuted by posting debunking done by others.
For instance, here is something that refutes the babble usually cited about anti-aircraft batteries at the Pentagon in 2001:
http://www.jod911.com/There_Are_No_Missile_Defenses_at_the_Pentagon.pdf
Scipio I only posted that video of the retired Major General as he is a military man like yourself and a good example of someone who, like myself, initially thought conspiracy theorists to be just cranks but has been completely converted by the undeniable facts of 911!
There is much more compelling evidence that it is utterly impossible that an airliner caused that damage to the Pentagon. Rather than quote it here, I will open a thread and post it on the 911 section.
One thing that surprises me is your unquestioning acceptance of the official story in the face of overwhelming evidence. Your always at pains to point out USA's military excellence and superiority yet your willing to swallow that a hijacked airliner can fly around eastern USA for 90 minutes and crash into the most protected building on earth with impunity!
Surely you know The Pentagon, White House & Capitol area is an absolute no fly area, protected by the most sophisticated three layer radar and air defence systems available. Andrews Air Force base is some 12 miles from the Pentagon and the 113th Fighter Wing stationed there calls itself the 'Capitol Guardians'!
Never mind that it's impossible the damage to the Pentagon was caused by a Boeing 767, surely you do not believe your military so incompetent they couldn't stop a slow moving plane like that 40 MINUTES AFTER the second plane was flown into the South Tower?
In the year leading up to 911, fighter jets were called out 67 times in the US to check on possible hijacked planes and on every occasion intercepted the suspect plane within 10 minutes of being alerted! On 911 they 'missed' all 4 known hijacked planes with up to 90 minutes notice! Stop being so naive Scipio!
http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/Schreyer-Vol-33-Oct2012.pdf
PS: Your link about the missile defence has no authenticity whatsoever!
-
Scipio I only posted that video of the retired Major General as he is a military man like yourself and a good example of someone who, like myself, initially thought conspiracy theorists to be just cranks but has been completely converted by the undeniable facts of 911!
There is much more compelling evidence that it is utterly impossible that an airliner caused that damage to the Pentagon. Rather than quote it here, I will open a thread and post it on the 911 section.
One thing that surprises me is your unquestioning acceptance of the official story in the face of overwhelming evidence. Your always at pains to point out USA's military excellence and superiority yet your willing to swallow that a hijacked airliner can fly around eastern USA for 90 minutes and crash into the most protected building on earth with impunity!
Surely you know The Pentagon, White House & Capitol area is an absolute no fly area, protected by the most sophisticated three layer radar and air defence systems available. Andrews Air Force base is some 12 miles from the Pentagon and the 113th Fighter Wing stationed there calls itself the 'Capitol Guardians'!
Never mind that it's impossible the damage to the Pentagon was caused by a Boeing 767, surely you do not believe your military so incompetent they couldn't stop a slow moving plane like that 40 MINUTES AFTER the second plane was flown into the South Tower?
In the year leading up to 911, fighter jets were called out 67 times in the US to check on possible hijacked planes and on every occasion intercepted the suspect plane within 10 minutes of being alerted! On 911 they 'missed' all 4 known hijacked planes with up to 90 minutes notice! Stop being so naive Scipio!
http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/Schreyer-Vol-33-Oct2012.pdf
PS: Your link about the missile defence has no authenticity whatsoever!
The fact 9/11 conspiracy theorists managed to get a guy with dementia on board doesn't account for much. Al Qaeda admitted ot the bombings and there is a ton of documentary evidence confirming it.
The claims there were SAM batteries on the Pentagon was and is absolutely absurd. The only thing more absurd is claiming they would shoot down any plane in 50 miles considering there is a flight lane 2 miles away.
The notion the US shot down 4 planes so they could pretend they crashed into buildings that we launched missiles into or is ridiculous. Moreover, I was listening to the radio when the WTC was hit and not far away I was just leaving a bank when the first hit. The WTC was being watched as the 2nd plane crashed. Upon the 2nd hit I knew it was an Al Qaeda attack because no way could there be an accident like that twice.
The claim the 4 planes were just a ruse to conceal we blew up the buildings and that planes coudl not do such damage alone is equally nonsense that engineers can and have refuted.
9/11 conspiracy claims just repate the same disproved nonsense over and over again hoping some sucker who never heard the debunking before will buy it.
The US had nothing at all to gain from 9/11.
Flight 93 was destroyed by brave passengers. What other building was wired to blow that didn't? How come they didn't blow it and lie and say the plane crashed into it if they did such with the Pentagon?
The claim US radar did not detect the planes going of course is completely wrong and records detial such. The US didn't shoot down the planes because no politician would give the order to blow up a civilan craft that they thought was hijacked simply. Until 9/11 they had not been used as weapons to crash into buildings.
The US doesn't even automatically shoot down enemy aircraft that enter our airspace let alone civilian aircraft just because they are off course.
With how much you like conspiracy theories that are nonsense I am amazed you are not in the Jeremy is innocent camp. That is actually more plausible than the 9/11 claims though not by much. I guess political ones are more your fancy.
-
I never said the US air defence shot down any planes, let alone 4 of them! The most defended air space on earth did not even get one fighter jet anywhere near any of the 4 airliners; I am surprised such a gung ho USA! USA! Fanatic like yourself is willing to swallow your multi $billion defence systems were so criminally incompetent! You might be surprised to learn all the commanders responsible for such a debacle were promoted within weeks of 911!
Never in history have any steel buildings been brought down by fire. Jet fuel and office furnishings do not burn at even close to the required temperature to even weaken steel and yet on 911 THREE massive skyscrapers collapsed into their own footprint at freefall speed! One of those buildings wasn't even hit by a plane or any debris of note! It is just scientifically proven to be impossible!
Have another look at this Scipio. Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth have 2213 professionals all saying the collapse of those 3 buildings could only be by controlled demolition. http://www.ae911truth.org
The Shanksville 'crash' is another unique event! Never before or since has a plane crashed and left no discernible debris. The 6 ton titanium and steel Rolls Royce engines just 'disappeared' along with the landing gear and all other evidence of a plane. That's as ridiculous as you saying the wings with those huge engines attached wouldn't dent the Pentagon walls but the thin and fragile fuselage can punch a 16 foot hole thru three rings of the Pentagon's reinforced concrete!
The NIST report is a complete joke; WTC 7 was brought down by an office furnishings fire! Only an idiot would believe that! And the 911 Commission Report is a criminal cover up ... it literally doesn't even mention WTC7, the complete collapse of a 47 storey skyscraper! And it doesn't even try to explain the collapse of the 3 buildings!
Please open your eyes Scipio. Sit down with a Coors Light and a bag of doughnuts and watch this video with an open mind ... if you still say it's a bunch of cranks and nutjobs then I will leave you to it .... 'it' being a state of blinkered, blissful ignorance!: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QU961SGps8g
-
I never said the US air defence shot down any planes, let alone 4 of them! The most defended air space on earth did not even get one fighter jet anywhere near any of the 4 airliners; I am surprised such a gung ho USA! USA! Fanatic like yourself is willing to swallow your multi $billion defence systems were so criminally incompetent! You might be surprised to learn all the commanders responsible for such a debacle were promoted within weeks of 911!
The claim US airspace was so heavily defended is just one of many lies. When an unexpected aircraft approaches from outside the US that is when there is concern of a threat. US aircraft going of course is mainly a concern for crashing into other aircraft.
You recited one of the lies constantly babbled about US aircraft intercepting any planes that go of course. Such claims are entirely made up. In the meantime the FAA did not notify the US military of the aircraft going of course until quite some time after. This is all contained in the extensive 9/11 commission reports where Congress went over everything with the fine tooth comb.
It is not criminally incompetent for the military not to go intercept and shoot down any civilian liners that went of course. That still even today is not a very palatable option despite the fact we now know terorrists are trying to hijack liners to crash them. Unless we knew for sure an aircraft was going to be crashed there is no way it will be shot down just for going of course even in today's post 9/11 world.
Never in history have any steel buildings been brought down by fire. Jet fuel and office furnishings do not burn at even close to the required temperature to even weaken steel and yet on 911 THREE massive skyscrapers collapsed into their own footprint at freefall speed! One of those buildings wasn't even hit by a plane or any debris of note! It is just scientifically proven to be impossible!
Until 9/11 crashing liners like this into structures like the WTC never happened. That is why it never happened before 9/11 but your claim his never happened in hostory is false it did happen on 9/11. Your claim it was scientifically proven that it is impossible for the liners to have caused the damage in quesiton is completely false. On the contrary engineers have explained the mechanics in great deatail. The exoskeleton damaged by the planes already weakend the Twin towers. Stell can indeed get hot enough from the fire of the materials in the buildings that were burning to weaken steel. The joint damage of weakened interior frame combined with the exterior frame being severed by the planes crashing through combined to result in the upper levels crashing into lower levels which could not handle the extra weight. Contrary to your claims you have no science on your side. You just make the unsupported claim that science is on your side but don't have any science that can actually refute the detailed claimes of engineers who explained the results.
Have another look at this Scipio. Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth have 2213 professionals all saying the collapse of those 3 buildings could only be by controlled demolition. http://www.ae911truth.org
The Shanksville 'crash' is another unique event! Never before or since has a plane crashed and left no discernible debris. The 6 ton titanium and steel Rolls Royce engines just 'disappeared' along with the landing gear and all other evidence of a plane. That's as ridiculous as you saying the wings with those huge engines attached wouldn't dent the Pentagon walls but the thin and fragile fuselage can punch a 16 foot hole thru three rings of the Pentagon's reinforced concrete!
The NIST report is a complete joke; WTC 7 was brought down by an office furnishings fire! Only an idiot would believe that! And the 911 Commission Report is a criminal cover up ... it literally doesn't even mention WTC7, the complete collapse of a 47 storey skyscraper! And it doesn't even try to explain the collapse of the 3 buildings!
Please open your eyes Scipio. Sit down with a Coors Light and a bag of doughnuts and watch this video with an open mind ... if you still say it's a bunch of cranks and nutjobs then I will leave you to it .... 'it' being a state of blinkered, blissful ignorance!: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QU961SGps8g
From my perspective only an idiot would buy this nonsense. Unsupported opinion of 2211 9/11 nuts doesn't mean anything to me at all. I don't accept unsupported opinions as evidence. I require rigorous scientific evidence that holds up to scrutiny. Instead there is just unsupported opinion based on lies or nothing at all.
7 WTC burned for many hours it did not blow up. The wate rpressure wa slow and worse springklers needed to be activated manually but the building had been evacuated. The fires burned out of control for hours spreading until the collapse. Blasts not only leave tell tale sounds worse they leave evidenc ein the form of specific blast patterns. That is what experts look for. That is what rational peopel use to try to find evidence of demolition.
Instead 9/11 conspiracy theorists just make up claims that buildings can't collapse without any science to back up their claims and just run with that. It is a joke. There are countless engineering studies explaining the mechanics of all 3 WTC collapses. They have been written by the best engineer minds in the world and reviewed as well. What do 9/11 conspiracy theorists have? Just lies about the US turning off all out radar and unsupported claims about buildings not being able to collpase from unabates fires after having their skeletons severely damaged.
Ther eis no need to respond to evidenceless claims even they can simply be mocked for citing lies and nonscientific mumbo jumbo.
-
None so blind as those who refuse to see!
Explain these blown up firemen then .... they were in the LOBBY waiting to go up the south tower to fight the fires long after the planes had crashed into the building?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5HTRJZujQj8
Explain how the BBC reported the collapse of WTC7 20 minutes BEFORE the building actually collapsed:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s
Explain how John Kerry, your current Secretary Of State, said WTC 7 was brought down in a "controlled fashion"? Even you know that it takes months of detailed planning to bring down a huge 47 story building in a "controlled fashion"!
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=818_1311356579&comments=1
I guarantee you will have no logical explanation for these three videos and will just dismiss them as the work of cranks and nutjobs!
The BBC, injured fireman on 911 and your current Secretary Of State John Kerry all nutjobs too?
-
None so blind as those who refuse to see!
Explain these blown up firemen then .... they were in the LOBBY waiting to go up the south tower to fight the fires long after the planes had crashed into the building?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5HTRJZujQj8
Explain how the BBC reported the collapse of WTC7 20 minutes BEFORE the building actually collapsed:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s
Explain how John Kerry, your current Secretary Of State, said WTC 7 was brought down in a "controlled fashion"? Even you know that it takes months of detailed planning to bring down a huge 47 story building in a "controlled fashion"!
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=818_1311356579&comments=1
I guarantee you will have no logical explanation for these three videos and will just dismiss them as the work of cranks and nutjobs!
The BBC, injured fireman on 911 and your current Secretary Of State John Kerry all nutjobs too?
They weren't blown up they said the lobby collapsed on them. In th emeantime they don't mention any bombs or the like only secondary explosions which is an explosion resulting from fire and in some cases the floors collpasing were reported as sounding like explosions.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
John Kerry sticks his foot in his mouth as much as Biden. He simply accepted the claim of the person asking him the question that it was "pulled". The reality is that pulled simply meant pulling everyone out of the building.
-
They weren't blown up they said the lobby collapsed on them. In th emeantime they don't mention any bombs or the like only secondary explosions which is an explosion resulting from fire and in some cases the floors collpasing were reported as sounding like explosions.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
John Kerry sticks his foot in his mouth as much as Biden. He simply accepted the claim of the person asking him the question that it was "pulled". The reality is that pulled simply meant pulling everyone out of the building.
Scipio stop squirming. The three firemen said it was a bomb that blew up the lobby many times. There is video of the shattered lobby with all windows blown out and this has NOTHING to do with floors collapsing; this is after the plane crash but long before the Tower collapsed!
There are numerous other videos of dozens of people talking about explosions or with sounds of explosions. Not only that 100+ firefighters have testified to hearing explosions in the towers! They didn't enter to long after the planes hit (obviously) and surely you're not going to suggest they are all mistaken and/or lying?
That BBC response is totally inadequate; just look at the public comments underneath it! "An error" is a ridiculous description; someone gave them that information and surely you have to find that at least very odd if not sinister?
John Kerry is your Secretary Of State for f--k sake; two heart attacks away from the Presidency! His words were "I do know" not "it might"!
It is scientifically proven that the only way a large building can collapse at freefall speed into it's own footprint is by controlled explosive demolition with millisecond timing to destroy all support columns! This isn't guess work Scipio and so far 2213 US architects have testified to this! Do some research before accepting the quite ludicrous 'finding' by NIST that it was an 'office furnishing fire' that caused that perfect collapse!
Firefighters & police officers saying WTC7 is "about to explode"! : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cU_43SwWD9A
-
Scipio stop squirming. The three firemen said it was a bomb that blew up the lobby many times. There is video of the shattered lobby with all windows blown out and this has NOTHING to do with floors collapsing; this is after the plane crash but long before the Tower collapsed!
I'm not squirming you are distorting. They didn't say anythign about bombs simply secondary explosions and the lobby roof collapsing on them. You have no reliable evidence of any kind to establish there were bombs anywhere so instead you resort to games that jsut make you look as pathetic and dishonest as Mike which makes you a hypocrite on top of all your other problems.
How do you establish there were bombs? You look for the blast patters bombs make among other things.
In the meantime there are very detailed engineering reports that all come to the same conclusions. The exterior of the Twintowers were part of the frame. The planes CLEARLY destroyed part of that frame. The floors were connected to these structures as well as to the main column. The floors became disconnected form the main column in part because of the various fires. The planes didn't crash at the top they crashed with a number of floors above, those floors collapsed because of the holes made by the planes as well as the fires. The collapsed floors added too much weight to the and each floor fell in succession on the one below causing the buildings to pancake.
WHat evidence do yo uhave to refute the claims of the engineers? Unsupported opinion from quacks who say that is not possible. Their unsupported opinion is as vlaueless as Mike's unsupported opinion about Jeremy's innocence and in fact just as dishonest as his claims because such people always post bogus nonsense.
There are numerous other videos of dozens of people talking about explosions or with sounds of explosions. Not only that 100+ firefighters have testified to hearing explosions in the towers! They didn't enter to long after the planes hit (obviously) and surely you're not going to suggest they are all mistaken and/or lying?
As a practical matter people who never heard a bomb are in no position to say whether they heard one or not or to differentiate windows blowing out from a bomb because windows blowing out create a sound that is like an explosion. There were in fact many different secondary explosions. Even experienced peopel have a hard time differentating explosion sounds. You bear the murder of proving the sounds were bombs not simply secondary explosions.
I saw a car that was on fire blow up, does the fact it blew up mean there was a bomb in it? What about houses I sw on the news the past few months or read about in the paper that exploded were they bombs?
None were determined to have been from bombs because if they had been from bombs then evidence would have been found to prove it.
When I was a teenager one mornign there were 4 explosions that rocked my town and those nearby. Was it bombs? No there was an accident that caused four manufacturing buildings to explode.
If I were to use your ridiculous criteria then they all were bombs just because they blew up.
That's your sole source of argument- there was an explosion heard so it had to be bombs.
Making that argument just makes you look stupid.
That BBC response is totally inadequate; just look at the public comments underneath it! "An error" is a ridiculous description; someone gave them that information and surely you have to find that at least very odd if not sinister?
First of all there is no one who can autheticate the video and prove it was not altered by 9/11 conspiracy theorists. 9/11 theorists lie and misrepresent constantly so that is not above them at all. If real all it proves is that the press was fed false information which is done all the time. The BBC doesn't have the original film to review. At any rate numerous times from 3:30 on peopel heard noises of things cracking and breaking and expected collapse to occur. Numerous times it was reported by people around the area that it was expected to collpase any second. It is not weird that someone could have misinformed the BBC anymore than when papers or news misreprt deaths that have not yet occurred because of misinformation. Sometimes the misinformation is intentional other times not. The notion that somone who planted a bomb notified the the BBC before they set the charges to go off makes zero sense.
But hey if you want to believe stupid crap go right ahead I choose to live in reality and not be a fool.
John Kerry is your Secretary Of State for f--k sake; two heart attacks away from the Presidency! His words were "I do know" not "it might"!
It is scientifically proven that the only way a large building can collapse at freefall speed into it's own footprint is by controlled explosive demolition with millisecond timing to destroy all support columns! This isn't guess work Scipio and so far 2213 US architects have testified to this! Do some research before accepting the quite ludicrous 'finding' by NIST that it was an 'office furnishing fire' that caused that perfect collapse!
Firefighters & police officers saying WTC7 is "about to explode"! : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cU_43SwWD9A
First of all the secretary of State is 4th in line and the public had nothing to do with him being there. He ran for president but lost because he is a clown. Part of being a clown is not thinking before you speak and speaking about things you are uninformed about. His supposed admission is not one at all. He was fed a claim and just ran with it he didn't go research what happened with WTC 7.
As for your claim that it is proven that only explosives can cause the collpases that is an outright lie and false. Such had neve rbeen proven at all and the speed of the collapses are always misrpresented as well. Your supposed evidence is little more than straw arguments combined with outright lies and unsupported opinions. Right now you are jus tliek Mike when I argue with him, if you want to look like such a dishonest fool go ahead but in out debates you have simply shown yourself to be very ignorant and immature.
-
A fool, ignorant, dishonest, immature, liar, pathetic, hypocrite! Anything else you want to call me Skippy? @)(++(*
You're the one who is just like Tesko, when faced with the facts you just squirm and deny like a 5 year old caught stealing sweets! And again like Tesko, you resort to infantile insults and throwing a tantrum because you know damn well your answers have no basis in fact whatsoever! Poor Skippy .... was you stamping your foot whilst typing?
You keep referring to engineers who have debunked all the conspiracy theories yet never name them or refer me to their reports. Unless you can supply the evidence Skippy, your protestations remain meaningless. At the same time when I refer you to 2213 Architects and Engineers testimony you dismiss it without even considering what they say!
Your mind is closed and your attitude is just win at all costs even when you have no evidence whatsoever to support your arguments!
Who would you listen to Skippy? How about an MIT professor? Have a look at this video below which gives undeniable, peer reviewed, scientific evidence that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that The Twin Towers and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition. I know it's difficult for you Skippy but try and have an open mind, take in the scientific evidence and note these highly accomplished professionals are NOT conspiracy theorists; they are many and varied scientists and engineers using the laws of physics and scientific research!
I believe there's more chance of USA paying of its $17 trillion debt than you having an open mind but hey, at least I tried. And I quite enjoy exposing your backward arrogance!
Enjoy: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OQgVCj7q49o
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pLZgvGeZPQ&feature=youtu.be
-
You keep referring to engineers who have debunked all the conspiracy theories yet never name them or refer me to their reports. Unless you can supply the evidence Skippy, your protestations remain meaningless. At the same time when I refer you to 2213 Architects and Engineers testimony you dismiss it without even considering what they say!
Your mind is closed and your attitude is just win at all costs even when you have no evidence whatsoever to support your arguments!
Who would you listen to Skippy? How about an MIT professor? Have a look at this video below which gives undeniable, peer reviewed, scientific evidence that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that The Twin Towers and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition.
For every 1 so called engineer or architect that claims 9/11 was an inside job you have around 100 that reject the claims. Al Queda took full responsibility for the attacks. The argument is beyond stupid
-
For every 1 so called engineer or architect that claims 9/11 was an inside job you have around 100 that reject the claims. Al Queda took full responsibility for the attacks. The argument is beyond stupid
Lies!
-
Lies!
A cheap response!
Binladen admits to planning 9/11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qloshSGAJ1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qloshSGAJ1s)
Engineers scoff at idea of controlled demolition.
https://youtu.be/vZbMfTtHkYM?t=28m12s (https://youtu.be/vZbMfTtHkYM?t=28m12s)